This invention relates to keyboards, and particularly keyboards which are used to input information into a typewriter, a word processor, or a computer.
History records that, at the time the standard Qwerty keyboard was developed in the late 1800's it way purposely designed to limit the speed with which a user could strike the keys. Because of the mechanical limitations in typewriter development, it was necessary at that time to limit the speed at which a typist could type, so that internal parts, in the typewriter, and particularly key levers, did not become jammed. The keyboard was therefore designed in such a way that high speed typing was awkward, and the keyboard arrangement automatically disabled the highest typing speeds theoretically obtainable by a skilled user.
Particularly in the typewriters available at that time, the type striking mechanism depended on gravity to return the type key lever after it had struck the paper. Thus the typing speed had to be slow, or the striking type levers would pile up on the returning type levers and jam the machine.
Many improvements have since been made in operating mechanisms of the typewriter, and now word processors and computers, so that the operating mechanisms no longer require a key arrangement that is disabling and awkward to the typist. Thus the disabling key arrangement, which had once been an asset to the typist, and was rather effective in limiting jamming from excessive typing speed, has become a costly and unnecessary problem. The standard Qwerty keyboard slows the speed of typing, increases the frequency of errors, loads the hands and fingers with disproportionate amounts of work, and produces fatigue in the hands and fingers of the typist.
Attempts have been made to remedy the faults of the Qwerty key arrangement but none has yet replaced that standard keyboard in regular use. Some of the key arrangements designed as improvements are those by F. M. M. Banaji, U.S. Pat. No. 1,336,122; C. Wolcott, U.S. Pat. No. 1,342,244; A. Dvorak et al, U.S. Pat. No. 2,040,248; R. G. Bower, U.S. Pat. No. 2,080,457; and X, U.S. Pat. No. 3,847,263.
Among these key arrangements, the only one known to have any degree of success at all is the Dvorak key arrangement, which is believed to be commercially available, although little known and little used, even though it has been in existence for approximately 50 years.
While a number of attempts have been made to solve the problem of inefficient key arrangements, the commercial market place is still committed to the use of the standard Qwerty keyboard in the absence of an alternative key arrangement which promises increased productivity once the new arrangement is learned, in combination with ease of learning the new arrangement.
In reviewing the attempts at improving the key arrangement, two major issues should be addressed. First, the improved key arrangement should offer significantly improved productivity, of keyboard output, for a skilled operator who has learned the improved key arrangement. Second, the training time for learning the improved key arrangement should be minimized. The first issue of improved keyboard output appears to have been more-or-less resolved by X, Dvorak, Dodds, and Bower, by putting the most-used keys on the home row. But a major problem in adopting those keyboards is that they make dramatic changes in the key locations, as compared to the standard Qwerty key arrangement. Dvorak relocates all but three of the keys in the three lower row. X, Dodds and Bower relocate all except two of the keys in the three lower rows. So it is clearly evident that very little of the knowledge about key location on the Qwerty key arrangement can be transferred to the other key arrangements of the prior art. Thus those prior art key arrangements which theoretically succeed at solving the productivity issue have little in common with the locations of the keys on the Qwerty keyboard; and the training amounts to a complete retraining of the user. And while Banaji has more keys in common with the Qwerty key arrangement, which facilitates the conversion training, Banaji does not indicate the desired productivity increase, using the same home row use criteria for determining productivity.
Thus, it is clear that there is a need for an improved key arrangement for keyboard operators. The key arrangements proposed in the past have not been widely accepted in the commerical market place; and it appears that this lack of acceptance is because they all fail to address at least one of the two major criteria of (i) potential productivity increase and (ii) acceptable training time. For those key arrangements which do indicate increased productivity, apparently no large user has been willing to pay the cost of the training, and no manufacturer has been willing to risk investing in the necessary tooling to make wholesale changes in this market, without the support of large users.
With the introduction of word processors and personal computers, any changes in key arrangements should be considered for adaptation to the computer and word processor market, as this represents an important segment of the commercial use of keyboards.
It is an object of this invention to provide an improved key arrangement which facilitates increases in typing speed while maintaining many of the keys in the same position as the Qwerty key arrangement, or a position close to that in the Qwerty key arrangement. By so maintaining many of the keys in the same position, the amount of training required to learn to use the new key arrangement is minimized.
The prior art has addressed the issue of balancing the work load between the left hand and the right hand, such that the work load is more balanced between the two hands. It has also addressed the issue of placing keys which have the most use on the home row, and of placing the most heavily used keys in position where they will be used by the strongest fingers.
While these attempts at improving the key arrangement have theoretical basis for improvements in the speed and efficiency of the sue of the keyboards, they fail to address the human factor of previous knowledge of the Qwerty key arrangement and how that affects learning the new key arrangement. And indeed, if typists were first trained on them, the new key arrangements proposed in the prior art might possibly be accepted. However, most people having potential for immediate use of the new key arrangement are those who have already been trained on the Qwerty key arrangement. By ignoring the users' existing knowledge, previous key arrangements have required that the user learn a new key arrangement where the locations of virtually all the keys have been changed from their locations in the Qwerty key arrangement, which the users are used to. Such a drastic change in the key arrangement has been difficult for the user to learn. History shows that few people are using previously proposed new key arrangements. It is clear that a new key arrangement is desirable, and that great benefit could be obtained from it.
In the instant invention, the advantages of having the most commonly used letters on the home row of the keyboard are retained. The key arrangement in the home row is further improved, in that, compared with key arrangements previously proposed for replacing QWERTY, more of the keys in the home row are left in the positions they occupy in the QWERTY key arrangement. Overall, half of the letter keys in the instant keyboard remain in the same positions they were in in the Qwerty keyboard, while more commonly used keys have been moved to the home row. In large part, the distance of movement of each key has been minimized.
For the fourteen keys in the three letter rows which have been moved, only two keys, K and T, have been moved any substantial distance. Thus significantly different locations need be learned for only these two keys. The other keys are either the same as in Qwerty, or are close by and easily found by remembering the Qwerty key arrangement. This close relationship to the location in the Qwerty arrangement makes the adaptation to the new key arrangement all the easier.
Improvement in typing speed and ease of recognition and learning of the new system are important on any new key arrangement.
These two criteria are fulfilled in the instant new and improved key arrangement. Ease of association is a strength of this key arrangement. The new letter layout puts the following letters on the "home row", which is the center row of the three rows in the letter portion of the key arrangement. The home row letters ##STR1## also contain the name of the new system. For easy identification and referral to this new letter arrangement, it is referred to as the ASER key arrangement, which is the letter pattern of the home keys for the left hand on the center row of letters. The balance of the letters can easily be remembered when they are incorporated into the name of the keyboard. Therefore the new system, for memory purposes, can be called ASER D HN TIO. This enables a person to immediately memorize the home row of the keyboard. The pronunciation of the name rhymes with the following words (Laser-Dee-Hen-Tie-Oh). Thus by having an assist in the pronunciation of the name, which represents the home row, the new user readily identifies and remembers all of the keys on that home row after a short time. The home row typically represents about 70% of the letter key use of the three rows of letter keys on an ASER keyboard.
Another aspect of the invention resides in use of the invention to convert standard Qwerty keyboards, or the like, on electronic word processors and computers into the new and improved instant key arrangement. This is done by supplying software which converts, as necessary, codes emanating from the keyboard, into corresponding codes for the characters in the key arrangement of the instant invention. Existing keyboards can continue to be used while the codes are converted by the software. The codes are, of course, converted such that the computer or word processor sees the keyboard as though it were a keyboard of the instant invention. Typewriters and some printers having printing elements such as ball elements or printwheels, are converted by replacing the ball or printwheel, or other printing element, with appropriate printing elements adapted for the ASER system. A keyboard may likewise be converted by moving key caps if desired.